|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,864
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,864 |
Ten years prior to Darwin's book a creationist wrote about adaptation. Coming off the ark was the horse kind, the deer kind, the elephant kind, cat kind and all the kinds that originated the animals we now see.
So there was one species of equine, and it became at least the three that remain today, yes? Ok, so how? By what process? Families aren't species. They are one category up from species, since they cannot produce fertile offspring cross-species. So lets go one more category up from there, to Perissodactyla, the order to which equine belongs. Are all members of Perissodactyla also a mere diversification of the original created species? How'd we get all the horses, the two or three types of rhinoceros, and tapers from that? What was the process? You answered this earlier. Adaptation.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation."
Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,742 Likes: 20
Campfire Sage
|
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,742 Likes: 20 |
It serves a function in a complete cell. Therefore its action glorifies God.
It does so today, but that doesn't mean it did so from the start.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,742 Likes: 20
Campfire Sage
|
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,742 Likes: 20 |
So there was one species of equine, and it became at least the three that remain today, yes? Ok, so how? By what process? Families aren't species. They are one category up from species, since they cannot produce fertile offspring cross-species. So lets go one more category up from there, to Perissodactyla, the order to which equine belongs. Are all members of Perissodactyla also a mere diversification of the original created species? How'd we get all the horses, the two or three types of rhinoceros, and tapers from that? What was the process?
You answered this earlier. Adaptation. Also called evolution by natural selection. Welcome to the evolution accepting club. You've arrived. You now accept that the two extant species of rhinoceros, the tapir, and the three surviving species of equine are all related by means of stemming from a common ancestor species, and that the mechanism was evolution by natural selection (also called adaptation).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651 Likes: 1 |
TF49 you are going to incite another emotional Darwinian meltdown. Very difficult to convince a seagull to stop squawking. Said with a straight face? Yep, take a look at your last three posts. Bafflegab. It's not my posts that are a problem, it's not science that is a problem...It is claim of special creation in the face of extensive evidence to the contrary that's a problem. Faith is the problem.
Last edited by DBT; 08/19/19.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651 Likes: 1 |
Logic tells us that a conviction of truth should be justified with evidence, and that evidence is a body of information that anyone can access and come to a similar conclusion. ... You wish this is true. Every evolutionist I read about was refuted by another evolutionist. Evolutionists refute creationist even when they have the facts. Therefore your logic is flawed. People will not come to a similar conclusion. They are people, after all. Any 'refutation' by evolutionists only happens in relation to the mechanisms, the theory, minor details, the significance of this or that bone particle... not the fact of evolution. But perhaps you'd like to back your claim? No? Thought not.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 945
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 945 |
TF49 you are going to incite another emotional Darwinian meltdown. Very difficult to convince a seagull to stop squawking. That goes both ways.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651 Likes: 1 |
Flood accounts do not equate to a worldwide deluge where even the mountains are submerged and an ark is needed to save a selection of people and animals in order to repopulate the earth......It did not happen, the story is impossible.
The story was probably embellished from a localized flood event/hero legend what a family saved their themselves and their livestock under difficult conditions, to the amazement of the surrounding tribes. The Flood did happen. The story is possible because it did happen. Because you don't believe it and maybe even read others don't believe it makes no never mind to the facts. The issue is not whether I believe in a world wide deluge, or not, the issue is not that you do, you can believe whatever floats your boat, this is just about the evidence for such an event. The problem being, there is no evidence for a world inundating flood. There is evidence for localized flooding.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651 Likes: 1 |
Stories? Yes, it would seem so.
The evolutionist would propose that complex life just erupted.... well no, we don’t know how but we have these ideas.... no, we can’t demonstrate nor provide evidence for those theories, but it must have happened kinda like we say because it did happen and since God is not “scientific” that cannot be the cause..... maybe aliens....we would rather believe in aliens than God.
Oh, and yes the fossil record does not really show any transitional forms but that is because,the fossil record in incomplete.
Yes, micro evolution is not macro evolution.... but we have an “ace.” There are genetic mutations and our ace is “time.” Over “time” all these things happened.
Oh, and all of you that don’t believe this are idiots.... more so, idiots that believe in “God.” How foolish of you, you should believe us as we are “scientists”. After all, you believe us about man causing global warming..... and the “universe from nothing” ..... don’t you?
Accrue enough 'micro changes' and you have a different animal. It won't happen overnight. Let me help you. It won't happen at all. If you get enough changes the species becomes extinct. Maybe reading a textbook on biology and evolution could help, just a suggestion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 4,354
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 4,354 |
This is another example of micro evolution because the evolution is always limited to the same family of species. Thunderstruck, you are another example of macro ignorance, but would you call evolution in the order Perisodactyla microevolution too? I would be happy to take a look at this perisodsctyla question, but ..... first....perhaps you could elaborate on your take on that Brooks Wiley Entropy etc issue from a couple of days ago. You kinda implied that if we didn’t understand it, our comments were... what ...meaningless? We wouldn’t have a clue unless we understood it..... I don’t want to waste your time with an ignorant comment and since you seem to know something, perhaps you could share? I gave you my view. What is yours? Having read the book I can say that even with a good bit of mathematics and a lot of evolutionary biology, it is VERY hard to understand. So, anyone that truly wants to throw entropy into either side of the evolution/creation debate better be crackerjack at both, and I mean crackerjack. As for my take on it. Entropy being the increase in disorder, evolution acts to increase disorder by forming the same (roughly) amount of matter into a generally increasing diversity of species. Hence, evolution in and entropic process. I'm not going to defend that statement, but simply leave it as a simple attempt to generalize the relationship between the two. Any more than that, and I may mispeak. And it's been a few decades since I last read it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 4,354
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 4,354 |
Stories? Yes, it would seem so.
The evolutionist would propose that complex life just erupted.... well no, we don’t know how but we have these ideas.... no, we can’t demonstrate nor provide evidence for those theories, but it must have happened kinda like we say because it did happen and since God is not “scientific” that cannot be the cause..... maybe aliens....we would rather believe in aliens than God.
Oh, and yes the fossil record does not really show any transitional forms but that is because,the fossil record in incomplete.
Yes, micro evolution is not macro evolution.... but we have an “ace.” There are genetic mutations and our ace is “time.” Over “time” all these things happened.
Oh, and all of you that don’t believe this are idiots.... more so, idiots that believe in “God.” How foolish of you, you should believe us as we are “scientists”. After all, you believe us about man causing global warming..... and the “universe from nothing” ..... don’t you?
Accrue enough 'micro changes' and you have a different animal. It won't happen overnight. Let me help you. It won't happen at all. If you get enough changes the species becomes extinct. Maybe reading a textbook on biology and evolution could help, just a suggestion. I've suggested that, but that doesn't go over well. And that shows in their constant repetitions of wrong-headedness.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 25,926 Likes: 2
Campfire Ranger
|
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 25,926 Likes: 2 |
If the donkey, the horse, and the zebra can produce cross-species offspring (although infertile), doesn't that imply that God didn't blink them into existence as separate species?
If he did blink them into existence as separate species in three distinct acts of creation, why would they have any chance at all of producing any sort of cross-species offspring, any more than, say, a flounder and a cottontail rabbit can?
If he didn't blink the donkey, the horse, and the zebra into existence as three separate species in three distinct acts of creation, then you must confess that they were at one time a single species. If so, how did they become three distinct species? By what process? Whatever your answer is, it cannot be that it was an example of micro evolution. It would have to be macro by definition, since they cannot produce fertile offspring cross-species, establishing that they are three different species of equine. Ten years prior to Darwin's book a creationist wrote about adaptation. Coming off the ark was the horse kind, the deer kind, the elephant kind, cat kind and all the kinds that originated the animals we now see. And Noah was, what, some 4000 years ago? And all these separate kinds, got split up into different orders, and those orders into separate families, and those families into separate genera, and those Genera into separate species, and those species divided into subspecies.............all in about 4000 yrs? Yet some claim that speciation occurs at a rate too slowly to explain the diversity upon the Earth today?
People who choose to brew up their own storms bitch loudest about the rain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097 |
Omnipresent! There is nowhere where God is not.
well then ,Where God is present evil is there also.
The natural world (the entire universe) is God's creation. He is no more part of it than a potter is part of the pot he makes.
When a christian says they radiate the Spirit, where is God? ..Does the spirit emit from within? or do christians just bounce the inbound sprit off like a mirror? Hinduism and Buhdism does not distinguish between nature and the creator, Sanskrit Upanishad states; "I indeed am this creation for I have poured it forth from myself, in that way he became this creation"
-Bulletproof and Waterproof don't mean Idiotproof.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,742 Likes: 20
Campfire Sage
|
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,742 Likes: 20 |
Entropy isn't an argument against increasing order, as it only applies to a closed system without an energy input. With an energy input like geothermic and solar energy, it fails as an argument against evolution. While both the sun and the earth are gradually losing energy, from the perspective of life, they are constantly adding energy to the system.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
Flood accounts do not equate to a worldwide deluge where even the mountains are submerged and an ark is needed to save a selection of people and animals in order to repopulate the earth......It did not happen, the story is impossible.
The story was probably embellished from a localized flood event/hero legend what a family saved their themselves and their livestock under difficult conditions, to the amazement of the surrounding tribes. You are missing the whole point. Have you read these flood accounts? You claim Genesis is a borrow account and then you say the other accounts were simply local disasters. Well if Genesis was recorded as a worldwide flood that wiped out the whole race it certainly did not borrow from a local washout account. The other accounts are not recording local washouts either. Where did all these accounts come from all over the world? They could not have been borrowing all from each other unless they started with a single source about a singular worldwide event. Your contention is lacking the most basic logic.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
Maybe reading a textbook on biology and evolution could help, just a suggestion. This is pretty humorous because the theories keep changing. A lot of schools are using textbooks with material that has been discounted by leading evolutionists, because by the time it prints and distributes an assumption of the theory has changed, but they will keep teaching it because that is in their textbook, and until new ones are obtained you need to keep teaching the outdated version because there is no other version available to the students. The evolution of the horse being a good example. Yup just go pick up a textbook and learn about Piltdown man and Lucy and the horses they rode.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
Flood accounts do not equate to a worldwide deluge where even the mountains are submerged and an ark is needed to save a selection of people and animals in order to repopulate the earth......It did not happen, the story is impossible.
The story was probably embellished from a localized flood event/hero legend what a family saved their themselves and their livestock under difficult conditions, to the amazement of the surrounding tribes. The Flood did happen. The story is possible because it did happen. Because you don't believe it and maybe even read others don't believe it makes no never mind to the facts. The issue is not whether I believe in a world wide deluge, or not, the issue is not that you do, you can believe whatever floats your boat, this is just about the evidence for such an event. The problem being, there is no evidence for a world inundating flood. There is evidence for localized flooding. The massive fossil record requires more than a neighborhood ride-about in your favorite pottery tub. 1. The burial of great quantities of animals together. 2. The evidence for the rapid burial of species with excellent preservation (little decay) of the fossils. 3. The presence of “non-native” species in burial grounds – meaning those same species are now found only on other continents. 4. The position of mammals suggest death by drowning. Geological processes as currently seen in the modern world do not produce such conditions. A world-wide catastrophic flood is the most logical explanation to these fossils buried in sedimentary rock.
Last edited by Thunderstick; 08/20/19.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 4,354
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 4,354 |
Maybe reading a textbook on biology and evolution could help, just a suggestion. This is pretty humorous because the theories keep changing. A lot of schools are using textbooks with material that has been discounted by leading evolutionists, because by the time it prints and distributes an assumption of the theory has changed, but they will keep teaching it because that is in their textbook, and until new ones are obtained you need to keep teaching the outdated version because there is no other version available to the students. The evolution of the horse being a good example. Yup just go pick up a textbook and learn about Piltdown man and Lucy and the horses they rode. Not changing, but developing, growing, yes. Like any science does as new things are discovered and added to the body of knowledge. But the core theory does not change. Now we know much more about how evolution happens. Sadly, many (most) schools do not teach evolution because of plain cowardice. Hence, the American public is pretty ignorant, relative to the rest of the world. But that's a problem in so many ways.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
Flood accounts do not equate to a worldwide deluge where even the mountains are submerged and an ark is needed to save a selection of people and animals in order to repopulate the earth......It did not happen, the story is impossible.
The story was probably embellished from a localized flood event/hero legend what a family saved their themselves and their livestock under difficult conditions, to the amazement of the surrounding tribes. But DNA studies are showing a lot of evidence for the human race coming from a single couple and then a wipeout and then re-population. Maybe you don't believe the evidence gathered from DNA.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
Maybe reading a textbook on biology and evolution could help, just a suggestion. This is pretty humorous because the theories keep changing. A lot of schools are using textbooks with material that has been discounted by leading evolutionists, because by the time it prints and distributes an assumption of the theory has changed, but they will keep teaching it because that is in their textbook, and until new ones are obtained you need to keep teaching the outdated version because there is no other version available to the students. The evolution of the horse being a good example. Yup just go pick up a textbook and learn about Piltdown man and Lucy and the horses they rode. Not changing, but developing, growing, yes. Like any science does as new things are discovered and added to the body of knowledge. But the core theory does not change. Now we know much more about how evolution happens. Sadly, many (most) schools do not teach evolution because of plain cowardice. Hence, the American public is pretty ignorant, relative to the rest of the world. But that's a problem in so many ways. Alleged discovery of missing links from credible science--national news--then silently disappearing as a hoax--that is not a change! Come on piltdown man and Lucy. Lucy is still on display at some museums.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
So there was one species of equine, and it became at least the three that remain today, yes? Ok, so how? By what process? Families aren't species. They are one category up from species, since they cannot produce fertile offspring cross-species. So lets go one more category up from there, to Perissodactyla, the order to which equine belongs. Are all members of Perissodactyla also a mere diversification of the original created species? How'd we get all the horses, the two or three types of rhinoceros, and tapers from that? What was the process?
You answered this earlier. Adaptation. Also called evolution by natural selection. Welcome to the evolution accepting club. You've arrived. You now accept that the two extant species of rhinoceros, the tapir, and the three surviving species of equine are all related by means of stemming from a common ancestor species, and that the mechanism was evolution by natural selection (also called adaptation). Creationists believe in natural selection and adaptation.
|
|
|
|
|
450 members (17CalFan, 160user, 1Longbow, 12344mag, 10gaugeman, 10ring1, 40 invisible),
2,108
guests, and
1,135
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,377
Posts18,488,460
Members73,970
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
